mpc5000 filters vs mpc4000 filters

Ive got a 4000 and the main thing that I was wondering if anyone has been able to compare the filters with the 4000 and the 5000? The rep from Akai said they blow the 4000 out of the water, but he would, wouldn't he. I dont think the filters on the 4000 are all that great. Would really like to hear back on this one!

bob wrote:The rep from Akai said they blow the 4000 out of the water, but he would, wouldn't he.

Yep...the mans gotta eat & pay bills right?

I remember the 4K filters, despite having a lot more options, sounding pretty $hitty compared to the other MPC's. If you wanted to do the low end theory for a sample it sounded like shyyt.

Even if the filters on the 5K sound more like the filters on the 1k and 2500...it will be a big improvement over the 4K filters.

ONE wrote:I remember the 4K filters, despite having a lot more options, sounding pretty $hitty compared to the other MPC's. If you wanted to do the low end theory for a sample it sounded like shyyt.

Even if the filters on the 5K sound more like the filters on the 1k and 2500...it will be a big improvement over the 4K filters.

Is that right? Hum, and to add to that...I would say the ASR would do 'em all in on the low end, but that's just my opinion.

And like I just stated...it's just an opinion

The 4k's filters aren't bad at all, because it's a machine built with high end sampling in mind, so of course it's not going to meet the criteria of most folks out there. And as I understand it, a lot of 'em can't even get with the sound of the converters..."too clean" they say.

I would agree that various samplers do have a sonic character to them but that's why you can alter that sound through other means (pre's & such).

I also think other reasons would play a vital part in deciding which MPC to get other than filters, and this may be more appropriate based on the stage of o.s. development on the 5k at the moment (stability). I'd probably wait it out to see if Akai's got a grip on that with the next o.s. upgrade.

I remember the 4K filters, despite having a lot more options, sounding pretty $hitty compared to the other MPC's. If you wanted to do the low end theory for a sample it sounded like shyyt.

Even if the filters on the 5K sound more like the filters on the 1k and 2500...it will be a big improvement over the 4K filters.

dude ... I know we have great weed in canada and all but that´s an unreal statement.. can someone confirm this (A/B test)

the filter in my XL sounded identical to the 2pole lp on my 4000.. and didn´t the 1k and the 2.5k used the same algorithms ?..

glide wrote:

I remember the 4K filters, despite having a lot more options, sounding pretty $hitty compared to the other MPC's. If you wanted to do the low end theory for a sample it sounded like shyyt.

Even if the filters on the 5K sound more like the filters on the 1k and 2500...it will be a big improvement over the 4K filters.

dude ... I know we have great weed in canada and all but that´s an unreal statement.. can someone confirm this (A/B test)

the filter in my XL sounded identical to the 2pole lp on my 4000.. and didn´t the 1k and the 2.5k used the same algorithms ?..

I owned a 4k and a 1k. I know what I'm talking about. I know what I heard. I also knew someone that got a 4k long after I let mine go, and while showing him how to use it...I showed him the filters....sorry...the low pass..especially...doesn't have a very good sound on the 4k. For certain types of techniques and sounds...I'd say..don't get the 4k cause it will be difficult for it to deliver how you would prefer within the machine itself.

I suggest if you really want to compare and A+B for your own curiosity go ahead. I already did this years ago, so I already have my answer.

Also, keep in mind what sounds good to you and what sounds good to me may differ.

Maybe you can't comprehend that something cheaper may have better qualities in some aspects? Well, it's real. It happens all the time in the real world. Take some time to wrap your mind around that possibility.

Also, keep in mind I was directly comparing the 1k and 4k when I A+B'ed. I didn't have access to a 2xl at the time.

i find the FX & filters much more better than the 4000

The 4000 fx & filter sucked a lot.

I love them on my 5000.

seeing the 5000 was produced after akai bought alesis I can see them gaining some new algorithms and techonolighy that could produce better filters (after all the 5k is 08 model)... but I am sure all other mpc where based on the same/similar akai algorithms

I think a thread where A/B ing filters of the mpc models would be very clearing .. as I dont quite trust opinions that are based on this sucks or thats wack, or your stupid..

I´m not a big fan of the 4k Fx but they are usable and no worse than the 2ks fx board

and if you dont know how to use filters the 4k filters they might disapoint, dunno .. you can do multiband filtering via layering on the 4k and if you set them up right they sound great!!, if you set them up wrong they wont sound so good...

so largely this is based on the user, what he knows and how he uses it..

end game...

glide wrote:so largely this is based on the user, what he knows and how he uses it..

end game...

Regardless, the different MPC's have different sound qualities right from the point of sampling...to sequencing...on board FX, and filters. They really don't sound the same. The 4k has a very clean, almost sterile, sound...you can get a more grittier and chunkier sound with it, but it's a real hassle. Requires a lot of extra steps. Now why bother if you can get a different MPC that sounds like how you want it...filters and all...without all the extra work?

I had the 4k...I know it can sound "nice" filters and all. But personally, I prefer the sound of 16 bit and lower MPC's. You may prefer the 4k sound...you may enjoy filtering each sample 3 separate times...layering them and adjusting....I don't. It's preference.

Honestly, if we had a thread here comparing how each MPC sounds, whether it's filters, fx, timing, etc. etc., damn near everyone posting would have a different opinion on which sounds better and why.

Preference of what you like sound wise...and more importantly...how you like to work is the end of story...that's why if you are so curious...and don't want to hear "opinions" cause you think you are smarter and more scientific...than by all means...do your research. Get your hands on some different model MPCs...test out the filters...the fx...the sound...have a blast...find out which ones sound better and have a better work flow for YOU..cause that is the only way you are going to be satisfied.

And again...Newer isn't a synonym for Better. Assuming something is better just cause it's newer is quite the logical fallacy.

And also...do the dirty work yourself...I did...I'm answered...I'm good.

Peace!

Well thanks or all the answers. Ive been away for a bit so have only just checked it all out. As usual some helpful, others not.

ONE : thanks for the comments. Didn't appreciate the "do the dirty work yourself" comment though. I thought the very purpose of a forum is to ask questions and discuss subjects. You live in Canada. I used to live in London. When you live in places like these you think its easy to go down to the local music store and try these things out. Im living in Spain right now and if you go into a music store they don't even know what an mpc is, yet alone have any to try out.

Ive got an s900 and an s1000. So I have managed to check out some other filters and on these my opinion is they are better. I play with the Low pass and and I just get a really nice feel from it. The problem is you are limited to Low Pass only. I was just wondering if there have been any improvements filter wise on the 5K.

Again its true what ONE was saying "Newer isn't a synonym for Better", however wouldn't you agree that if Akai where to research forums like this they would find a few recurring issues from their customers such as the filters not being as good as they could be. Surely its places like this that gave them the idea to come up with the old school option on the 5K. I was just wondering if they had taken a similar approach with the filters.

DABMEISTER: I agree the filters on the 4K "arent that bad". I think its a really good machine but I have to say if I could change one thing it would be the filters. I really get on with almost everything else. To me the filters sound slightly tinny and thin. Im not sure if this is the same as sterile or not. Again on my s900 and s1000 the low pass does seem warmer and fatter, although its true they aren't high end machines which give a completely true recreation of the sound.

A couple of people of people have commented on layering filters. I agree, it a viable option. Yes the user will make a difference, but I don't know who started all this "its all down to the user" saying, which I keep coming across. Nothing is completely down to the user. The equipment you use will play a major part in the sound and feel you create. Yes you can layer filters but isn't it great when you can use equipment in a straight forward way which just give you results that sound great. For example I could layer various types of Low pass filters to really try and manipulate the slope of the cut off to try and recreate a sound of the S900 but if I go straight to the S900 I can do it in one go and the sound I get I just prefer.

Anyway, back to the original question. If anybody has bought the 5K and did have/still has the 4K what's your first opinions on the filters (Superior/ pretty much the same/ or God forbid inferior)?